Public Opinion
-
once a runner
- Official BleacherCoach
- Posts: 972
- Joined: January 30th, 2004, 12:16 pm
Re: Public Opinion
Vman, after some time away, I do see my quote doesn't communicate what I was trying to say and it doesn't make sense the way it is written. What I should have said is that if someone does an action that is questionable, it will label them, right or wrong. Suppose someone is accused of shoplifting and is later acquitted. People will still look upon that person with suspicion.
The same thing with Irey's husband. He hooked up with an arms dealer to do work in Iraq. The deal ended badly under suspicious circumstances. If even it's 100% above board, it will cast a shadow of suspicion over Robert Irey and that will spill over to his wife.
It is possible to do things legally, successfully and yet be ethically questionable. Take Larry Flynt for example. What he does is legal, he makes a boat load of money, but does it he make that money ethically?
Another thing about Irey, how come the RNC has not helped her out much? She hasn't received national support from her own party as of yet. She has like $75,000 where Murtha is around 2 million. That can't bode well for her.
The same thing with Irey's husband. He hooked up with an arms dealer to do work in Iraq. The deal ended badly under suspicious circumstances. If even it's 100% above board, it will cast a shadow of suspicion over Robert Irey and that will spill over to his wife.
It is possible to do things legally, successfully and yet be ethically questionable. Take Larry Flynt for example. What he does is legal, he makes a boat load of money, but does it he make that money ethically?
Another thing about Irey, how come the RNC has not helped her out much? She hasn't received national support from her own party as of yet. She has like $75,000 where Murtha is around 2 million. That can't bode well for her.
Last edited by once a runner on September 20th, 2011, 12:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Public Opinion
Though under self-imposed hiatus from sports blog Vman had to respond to oar here before w/e and may just dabble in the political arena for a while!
[quote="once a runner";p="124665"]
What I should have said is that if someone does an action that is questionable, it will label them, right or wrong. [/quote]
You are judging (falsely I may add) that her husband has done something wrong. But then I should remember that we (esp the US military are the bad guys-in the eyes of the left) are in he wrong if involved in the war effort at all!
[quote="once a runner";p="124665"]
Suppose someone is accused of shoplifting and is later acquitted. People will still look upon that person with suspicion.
[/quote]
You are the only one "accusing" Rbrt. Irey of anything! As previously noted some may well view he & Dale Stoffel as heroic! They were awarded contracts for the refurbishing of the 1 st Iraqi Armored Brigade. Do you think this was a safe area at that time? H3ll No, but it needed handled by someone and Irey with his now deceased partner Dale Stoffel were performing a valuable service.
To the Americans, it was a public relations bonanza. The Iraqi military had been disbanded after the invasion. If the occupiers could show the army was getting back on its feet with newly overhauled equipment, everyone looked good.
To Stoffel and CLI were going to make money but the venture also represented a windfall for the Iraqi government, which would get whatever funds were leftover from selling the military scrap, after the refurbishing was done.
The Iraqi Ministry did authorize payment to Stoffel and CLI (Irey's co.) but an appointed intermediary never paid them! Stoffel paid with his life and Irey claims to have never been paid....now again what are you or the left accusing him of ???
But good try with your:
[quote="once a runner";p="124665"]
The deal ended badly under suspicious circumstances. [/quote]
Then another ambiguous/throw anything against the wall & see if it sticks comments:
[quote="once a runner";p="124665"]
If even it's 100% above board, it will cast a shadow of suspicion over Robert Irey and that will spill over to his wife.
[/quote]
Can I attempt translation? Even if her husband performed a valuable service towards the war effort, garnered no payment, lost his friend & business associate, oar &/or the left will attempt to spin this to reflect badly on his wife! Or, although it is not true we will use it in our "any thing goes" campaign vs the Republicans!
[quote="once a runner";p="124665"]
Another thing about Irey, how come the RNC has not helped her out much? She hasn't received national support from her own party as of yet. She has like $75,000 where Murtha is around 2 million. That can't bode well for her.
[/quote]
Sorry but let's look at this statement another way: where did JM get all these contributions???
The Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan campaign-finance watchdog group, lists Mr. Murtha as the top recipient of defense industry dollars in the current 2006 election cycle.
[quote="once a runner";p="124665"]
What I should have said is that if someone does an action that is questionable, it will label them, right or wrong. [/quote]
You are judging (falsely I may add) that her husband has done something wrong. But then I should remember that we (esp the US military are the bad guys-in the eyes of the left) are in he wrong if involved in the war effort at all!
[quote="once a runner";p="124665"]
Suppose someone is accused of shoplifting and is later acquitted. People will still look upon that person with suspicion.
[/quote]
You are the only one "accusing" Rbrt. Irey of anything! As previously noted some may well view he & Dale Stoffel as heroic! They were awarded contracts for the refurbishing of the 1 st Iraqi Armored Brigade. Do you think this was a safe area at that time? H3ll No, but it needed handled by someone and Irey with his now deceased partner Dale Stoffel were performing a valuable service.
To the Americans, it was a public relations bonanza. The Iraqi military had been disbanded after the invasion. If the occupiers could show the army was getting back on its feet with newly overhauled equipment, everyone looked good.
To Stoffel and CLI were going to make money but the venture also represented a windfall for the Iraqi government, which would get whatever funds were leftover from selling the military scrap, after the refurbishing was done.
The Iraqi Ministry did authorize payment to Stoffel and CLI (Irey's co.) but an appointed intermediary never paid them! Stoffel paid with his life and Irey claims to have never been paid....now again what are you or the left accusing him of ???
But good try with your:
[quote="once a runner";p="124665"]
The deal ended badly under suspicious circumstances. [/quote]
Then another ambiguous/throw anything against the wall & see if it sticks comments:
[quote="once a runner";p="124665"]
If even it's 100% above board, it will cast a shadow of suspicion over Robert Irey and that will spill over to his wife.
[/quote]
Can I attempt translation? Even if her husband performed a valuable service towards the war effort, garnered no payment, lost his friend & business associate, oar &/or the left will attempt to spin this to reflect badly on his wife! Or, although it is not true we will use it in our "any thing goes" campaign vs the Republicans!
[quote="once a runner";p="124665"]
Another thing about Irey, how come the RNC has not helped her out much? She hasn't received national support from her own party as of yet. She has like $75,000 where Murtha is around 2 million. That can't bode well for her.
[/quote]
Sorry but let's look at this statement another way: where did JM get all these contributions???
The Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan campaign-finance watchdog group, lists Mr. Murtha as the top recipient of defense industry dollars in the current 2006 election cycle.
Last edited by vman on September 20th, 2011, 12:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
I have to say thank you to me ..." for not being stupid enough to go to Penn State."
-
Counter Strike
- Junior
- Posts: 101
- Joined: August 12th, 2005, 11:14 am
Ummm…Sanctuary?
http://www.freepa.org
I guess if illegal immigrants took the time to become U.S. citizens, they wouldn’t be doing idiotic things like trying to claim sanctuary in a church (emphasis mine).
Immigration activists around the country are taking up the cause of a single mother who invoked the ancient principle of sanctuary and took refuge in a Chicago church rather than submit to deportation to Mexico.
Elvira Arellano, 31, was holed up for a second day Wednesday at Aldalberto United Methodist Church with the support of the congregation’s pastor. With her was her 7-year-old son, Saul, an American citizen.
Federal officials said there is no right to sanctuary in a church under U.S. law and nothing to prevent them from arresting her. But they would not say exactly what they planned to do, or when.
Perhaps someone should have spent more time learning U.S. customs and laws and less time watching movies, eh?
Let me also point out two other items of note in the story. The first is the use of the phrase “immigrant activists.” What exactly is an immigrant activist? Well, apparently it’s nothing more than a PC way to describe individuals that feel that those people that cross our borders illegally deserve the same rights that a U.S. citizen would have. These “immigrant activists” oppose the enforcement of our laws, and apparently would like to see the United States move to having completely open borders. Oh, and apparently these activists are now united in the form of a movement.
She is the face of the movement,” said Emma Lozano, executive director of the Chicago immigration-rights group Centro Sin Fronteras, who was at the church with Arellano.
In Phoenix, Martin Manteca of Mi Familia Vota said Hispanic activist groups were organizing a vigil in her support. Lozano said an event also was scheduled in Detroit.
Sigh. We actually have a movement in this country of wackos that want the government not to enforce our laws…
One last thought on this. If pro-enforcement politicians would like to make a statement, take a stand on this. Stand up to the emotion-whoring side of this debate that has no logic to defend themselves with, but instead takes up the case of an idiotic woman who broke our laws to come in here and then holed up in a church because she saw it work in a movie once. I think that citizens of this country would feel much better about this issue if this incident would have lasted about five minutes before this woman was dragged out in handcuffs and deported. The fact that the police are there and aren’t doing anything speaks volumes about the problem with immigration here in the United States. When the government and the police stop enforcing the law…why have it?
http://www.freepa.org
I guess if illegal immigrants took the time to become U.S. citizens, they wouldn’t be doing idiotic things like trying to claim sanctuary in a church (emphasis mine).
Immigration activists around the country are taking up the cause of a single mother who invoked the ancient principle of sanctuary and took refuge in a Chicago church rather than submit to deportation to Mexico.
Elvira Arellano, 31, was holed up for a second day Wednesday at Aldalberto United Methodist Church with the support of the congregation’s pastor. With her was her 7-year-old son, Saul, an American citizen.
Federal officials said there is no right to sanctuary in a church under U.S. law and nothing to prevent them from arresting her. But they would not say exactly what they planned to do, or when.
Perhaps someone should have spent more time learning U.S. customs and laws and less time watching movies, eh?
Let me also point out two other items of note in the story. The first is the use of the phrase “immigrant activists.” What exactly is an immigrant activist? Well, apparently it’s nothing more than a PC way to describe individuals that feel that those people that cross our borders illegally deserve the same rights that a U.S. citizen would have. These “immigrant activists” oppose the enforcement of our laws, and apparently would like to see the United States move to having completely open borders. Oh, and apparently these activists are now united in the form of a movement.
She is the face of the movement,” said Emma Lozano, executive director of the Chicago immigration-rights group Centro Sin Fronteras, who was at the church with Arellano.
In Phoenix, Martin Manteca of Mi Familia Vota said Hispanic activist groups were organizing a vigil in her support. Lozano said an event also was scheduled in Detroit.
Sigh. We actually have a movement in this country of wackos that want the government not to enforce our laws…
One last thought on this. If pro-enforcement politicians would like to make a statement, take a stand on this. Stand up to the emotion-whoring side of this debate that has no logic to defend themselves with, but instead takes up the case of an idiotic woman who broke our laws to come in here and then holed up in a church because she saw it work in a movie once. I think that citizens of this country would feel much better about this issue if this incident would have lasted about five minutes before this woman was dragged out in handcuffs and deported. The fact that the police are there and aren’t doing anything speaks volumes about the problem with immigration here in the United States. When the government and the police stop enforcing the law…why have it?
"Don't Play Dumb With Me.....I'm Better At It"